Opinion
CV 00-555-AS
November 9, 2000
Christopher Lamont Williams Salem, Oregon Pro Se Plaintiff.
J. Scott Moede Deputy City Attorney Office of City Attorney Portland, Oregon Attorney for Defendants.
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION
The matter before the court is defendants' motion for stay of proceedings (doc. 17).
Plaintiff brings this pro se civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of his constitutional rights related to his arrest in Multnomah County on March 11, 1999. The criminal charges resulting from the arrest are still pending. circumstances, federal courts may not enjoin or otherwise interfere with pending state criminal prosecutions on constitutional grounds, and must abstain and allow the state court to adjudicate all claims, citing Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37, 49-53 (1971).
The Ninth Circuit analyzes the interplay of § 1983 actions and pending criminal charges or convictions under the rule of Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994), rather than the Younger abstention rule. Harvey v. Waldron, 210 F.3d 1008 (9th Cir. 2000); Smithart v. Towery, 79 F.3d 951, 952 (9th Cir. 1996). Therefore, I recommend that defendants' motion to stay (doc. 17) be DENIED, with leave to file a motion to dismiss premised on application of the Heck v. Humphrey rule to plaintiff's various claims.
SCHEDULING ORDER
The above Findings and Recommendation will be referred to a United States District Judge for review. Objections, if any, are due November 27, 2000. If no objections are filed, review of the Findings and Recommendation will go under advisement on that date.
If objections are filed, a response to the objections is due December 11, 2000, and the review of the Findings and Recommendation will go under advisement on that date.